Subject:
|
Re: Apology.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 24 Nov 2001 19:49:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
134 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > Summing, I am completely satisfied that I in fact did give an apology, and
> > admitted fault. That is not the same as saying I won't do it again(1). That
> > is also completely independent of whether you agree or not. If you still
> > aren't getting the distinction you may want to review the definition of apology.
>
> Something needs to be done. All of our e-mails are displayed here based on
> trust. If members here feel they have the right to abuse that trust, what
> sort of place will this become?
>
> This person has taken my details from this forum, and used them to commit a
> fraudulent act and invade my privacy. He is now threatening to repeat that
> action. This, in my view, is completely unacceptable. Anyone who has any
> regard for civil liberties will recognise that.
>
> Ban him.
... and he his doing do whilst casting insults, untruths and *knowing* it
breaks the ToU here:
==+==
See, I march to my own metronome, and the violation of his privacy rights
when weighed against the harm he causes here on a daily basis with his lies
and slurs and troublemaking just tilted the balance for me to do something I
know is a violation of the ToS.
==+==
Ban him.
Scott A
>
> Scott A
>
>
> FUT lugent.admin.general
> x-posted to .general, as this is an issue which concerns us all... or at
> least is should.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Calling for banishment?
|
| I'm stuck here, because I'm more honest than most. Were the shoe on the other foot, Scott would have no qualms about saying he'd never do it again, even if in his heart of hearts he knew he might. Yes I violated Scott's privacy a teeny teeny bit. I (...) (23 years ago, 24-Nov-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
